New AT motor technology

So where does this fit into the pricing range of existing product lines? If it isn't cheaper than single-use, as Jerry hinted, why would it be useful?

~ Duane Phillips.

Welcome back Gary.

I thought I saw it in an old (original) RMS document. Am I mistaken?

I made no claim about their actual life.

It is cheaper "per flight" than single use (expensive case used on each SU, AND has a faster breakeven than metallic case systems, albiet at the cost of replacing cases more often.

Actual "cheapest" will be a pricing strategy factor by RCS.

Jerry

Selling only as a package with three grain sets will increase the price to consumers and depress sales. Many motors will be lost on the first flight. Caseless grains will accumulate until the kids (those over 18 of course) fashions some sort of IED to get rid of them. :(

OTOH if it is simply means to lower SU motor prices by making them less expensive to manufacture, ship, and store, that would be a very good thing.

Alan

thanks for clearing that part up.

so the yellow forward closures on the RCS site are the ones used with your older G80s that had phenolic nozzles and yellow screw nuts instead of the new molded cases ?

Darn again ;-)

I could always sell you the RMS hardware at 25% off and make the break even cost a bit lower. :-)

It is the "per flight" cost that I intended. If we are talking a < $2 difference per flight between SU and this new variety, I personnaly would stick with SU. Less hassle. As I understand it so far, a 3 pack < 2 pack SU. This does not seem to be a significant reason to switch from SU. It does, however, make a difference from the RMS line, in that users will eventually build up a supply of casings that one can stand to lose.

What do you mean here; please explain?

~ Duane Phillips

In article snipped-for-privacy@buckeye-express.com, AlMax at snipped-for-privacy@unverified.com wrote on 3/14/05 3:51 PM:

Yes except that those yellow bulkheads do not screw in. Smooth fit in the

Sorry. :-(

Gary

In article snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com, Duane Phillips at snipped-for-privacy@askme.askme wrote on 3/14/05 4:05 PM:

It will probably result in about 30% less per flight (about $4 per flight on an F20W for example).

Gary

In article snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com, Jerry Irvine at snipped-for-privacy@gte.net wrote on 3/14/05 3:19 PM:

The original advertising said "thousands of flights", but I'm sure the practical lifespan is defined more by the point at which the rocket (and motor) is lost.

In terms of mechanical stress IIRC Dan Meyer calculated many thousands of cycles before failure.

Gary

In article snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com, Duane Phillips at snipped-for-privacy@askme.askme wrote on 3/14/05 3:14 PM:

It would fit between single-use and "traditional" reloads.

Gary

Gary posted today his intent is to price it between SU and RL. So that is your answer.

Based on your comments, which I largely agree with, it would seem SU sales are likely to continue.

Jerry

Well, I log all my flights, so I can search for E16, E23, F22, F40, F52, G33, and G64 and tell how many times I've flown my 29/40-120 stuff. Now I do have 2 of the 24 and 29, so I can't tell which casing got how much use, but I just have one of everything else.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

The same proof he always shows.... NONE!

Very reasonable, and something I'll probably give a try -- I don't tend to fly many SU because I'm not fond of the cost per flight on SU loads.

-Kevin

slipped by everyone, but I did mean "Banshee." The wink was for JI.

The question is, how will this "new techknowelegy" (AT-NT) be implemented.

For SU, there's no question - use once and toss.. for RMS. - keep using, as the case failure is probably due to something else (like a missing o-ring)

For these new thingies, they're built to handle 3 or more uses. Will S&T/TMT test them to verify that 5,6,7, 10 uses still result in a "certified motor"? There's got to be a failure point in these "limited reuse" things, and unlike real RMS, probably can't be used 10's (or 100's) of times... That seems to be something that AT/S&T/TMT will need to determine!

Is the failure at 5 uses or 7 uses, or 50 uses? (trust me.. there will be atleast one flier who thinks it's the "lucky case" and keep reusing it like a RMS, over and over again!) If the LU case causes a problem on it's 10 usage, will this be covered by TRA/NAR insurance, as it was a "certified" configuration, or is not certified, as the case was used more than 3 times? How can the case usage be tracked, as the "use 3 times" appears to be a basis for pending certification...

Gosh... I really th>

It's essentially the same "hardware" as AT's molded single use motors. So you're paying for one "single-use" case but getting three flights out of it -- definitely a savings.